Once again, the US Women’s Soccer Team has won the World Cup. With this win comes the usual fanfare: wall-to-wall coverage of the tournament, puff pieces about the players, parades, media appearances, and the inevitable answer/question on “Jeopardy” in 2+ years before fading away into obscurity. This year is a little bit different, thanks to one of the players, Megan Rapinoe. Even before the team won the World Cup, she came out and said she wouldn’t go to the White House to visit President Donald Trump in part because she doesn’t feel he’s been inclusive to people like her.
Meaning white female soccer players with purple hair? Oh, wait, I forgot Rapinoe is a lesbian because I really don’t care what or who she does when she’s off the field. What she’s doing in refusing a trip to the White House over inclusion is taking a stand Leftists are applauding (because…Orange Man Bad?). But she’s also giving us a topic for a Leftist Lexicon blog!
What the Left thinks it means – making sure everyone feels welcomed and comfortable in a social/political environment
What it really means – agreeing with and condoning Leftist behavior under any and all circumstances
Leftists talk the talk when it comes to inclusion. They invent multiple genders (most of them variations on a theme), insist you call people by their preferred pronouns (even if they’re harder to pronounce than Klingon), and talk about “safe spaces” where people can go to be validated for being the way they are. They tell their followers how powerful these differences are and nurture the idea these differences are core to who they are.
Until someone comes along who doesn’t follow Leftist dogma. Then, the Left’s inclusion talk goes the way of Eric Swalwell’s Presidential campaign. Now, I’m not saying the Right doesn’t do this, but it’s been my experience the Left is faster to the banhammer than the Right is over what amounts to a miniscule deviation from the ideological playbook. The purpose of this hardline approach is simple: the Left needs to keep its talking points straight, and any difference of opinion endangers that.
The funny (and by funny I mean weird) part is how willing the Left is to embrace inclusion the further left you skew. Today, the Left celebrates prepubescent drag queens who aren’t even old enough to get pimples, let alone wear pumps and feather boas. Tomorrow, the line will get shifted further leftward, and the Left will rally for more inclusion. But it’s not just inclusion they’re looking for; it’s normalization. Once something is seen as normal to average Americans, the controversy that preceded it falls away. Then, people can frame those who still see the controversy as backwards…with the help of our Leftist friends in the media. After all, if our neighbors think an 11 year old drag queen is fine, why shouldn’t we?
This is what is known in logical fallacy circles as an appeal to popularity, with a little appeal to authority mixed in for good measure. The Left has a stake in creating what they consider an inclusive environment because it helps solidify their political power and coerces people into agreeing with their ideas out of fear of ridicule, or in the case of Antifa, physical violence.
Not an inclusive position, don’t you think?
The funny (and by funny I mean funny, yet fitting) part is the Right already does what the Left claims they want. With only a handful of exceptions, most conservatives are easy-going and are willing to accept anyone into their groups, even if these folks disagree with them. They enjoy discussing issues and ideas with passion and purpose and they typically don’t end friendships or cut ties with family members over political disagreements. I probably shouldn’t do this, but I happen to have the super secret Conservative Inclusivity Plan which I will share with you now.
1) Be friendly
2) Find common ground with each other
3) Don’t let the differences spoil the commonalities
4) Grill meat of some fashion
Okay, so I added that last part under direction from some friends of mine in Texas, but the point remains clear. Inclusion isn’t and should never be about indoctrination or conforming to an idea or cause. Inclusion requires, well, including people. If you follow the #WalkAway movement online, you will see account after account, testimony after testimony, of people who have been welcomed, even if they don’t plan to vote for Donald Trump because it’s not about Trump. It’s about finding that place where you feel like you belong without fear of running afoul of the unwritten codes of a particular group.
Although Rapinoe’s message is the right one, she was the wrong person to be the messenger for it because she has shown her notion of inclusion is rather exclusive to those who agree with her. And here’s the kicker, if you’ll pardon the pun. On the whole, Donald Trump has been more inclusive with his Cabinet picks and staff than people realize. After all, Trump is the first President in our history to have been in favor of gay marriage from the outset of his Presidency.
And who was the candidate who said repeatedly marriage was between a man and a woman? Hillary Clinton.
Sorry, Megan. Looks like you just scored an ideological own-goal here. Or two.